[350] “St-Petersburg vedomosti” of the 10th of March 1992. The article “The CIA Planned to Kill the Father of Peoples” said (with reference to the book “Old Friends: American Elite and the CIA Origins” by historian Burton Hersh) that the CIA director Allen Welsh Dulles approved of the plan of Stalin’s assassination in 1952. From this we can understand that J. Stalin’s influence upon the global policy was a very significant hindrance, as far as such an operation was planned concerning an old man (On the December 6th, 1952 J.V. Stalin was 74. His real date of birth, which is confirmed in church records, is the December 6th, 1878), who, taking into account the state of his health and way of life, had just several years more to live.
[351] The 14th, 15th and 16th volumes of J. Stalin’s works were edited in 1997 in Moscow by the publishers «Writer».
R. Kosolapov prepared and organized the edition of the volumes. During Gorbachev’s reconstruction he filled the post of the chief editor of the theoretical organ of the Central Committee of the CPSU — the magazine «Communist» (we can’t say he «worked at his post», if we correlate what was going on in the country with what was published in the magazine «Communist» when R. Kosolapov was at the head of it). The matter of the 14th — 16th volumes, which continue the edition of J. Stalin’s works, was formed with some additions according to the edition of his works published in the USA for «Sovietologists’» needs. It included 14th — 16th volumes published on the basis of the sample copies of the might-have-been soviet edition, which were found in the USA.
[352] K. Simonov was one of the USSR most erudite cultural workers, and in most cases a man, who had independent and not trite thoughts. However even with such qualities he appeared to be psychologically unready to apprehend that little bit of the social truth, which J.V. Stalin stated in his speech at the Central committee plenary session. His example is one of numerous indices that there are statistically objective limits of information perception by any audience (from one person to the whole mankind). No one who brings information home to people can transgress those limits without causing psychological breakdown of this or that kind: depression, stupor, hysterics directed towards the audience itself or towards other people.
[353] Pier Courtad’s epigraph to the book «About the USSR’s Nature. Totalitarian Complex and a New Empire» by Edgar Moren (Moscow, «Science for the Society», 1995; French edition — Fayard-1983).
1 As an example of presuming «know-alls»’ attitude to the «leader» and his works — people who forgot that due to God’s mercy every nation lives a bit better than it deserves according to its temper and ethics — here is an extract from the article «Goebbels’ Creative Development» by B. Khazanov, published in «Oktyabr’» («October») magazine, № 5, 2002:
«Indeed, a great abasement of our time was that the roles of omnipotent rulers were played by mean, unscrupulous, narrow-minded people with primitive way of thinking and poor cultural background. As Goebbels once said — «Leadership has very little in common with education». He was right. One can talk about Stalin’s striking guile as much as he/she likes, one can wonder at his instinctive understanding of methods and machinery of absolute power — but it’s enough to read the leader’s works to evaluate his closed mind. One can admire Hitler’s ability to hypnotize the crowd — but his chaotic book produces the same lamentable impression as Stalin’s works. There’s nothing common with greatness — it’s a question of remarkable meanness.
Power corrupts its bearer; power lets his vile instincts expand in plenty. But there’s power’s charm. Power — and especially omnipotent power — throws reflection on everything that the ruler does. Platitudes from a tyrant’s lips seem to be insight, vulgarity transforms into profundity of thought, coarse humor turns into sophisticated wit. Harshness, meanness, immorality are interpreted as dictates of the highest necessity. Omnipotence aura makes slaves romanticize the ruler, worship his divine boots. This explains the wish to see the dictator as a great man, in spite of obviousness, or at least imagine him as a demon, raise him to the rank of Antichrist. The thought that we were ruled by a pygmy is unbearable».
— Change the Past Tense onto the Present one in this quotation and you’ll get a text, which would be signed by many representatives of Stalin’s Bolshevism soviet “elite”. But in that epoch they hid such thoughts even from themselves, as they were afraid to fall victims of denunciation from «high-moral know-alls» like themselves. But due to such kind of evaluation of Stalin’s personality and works by Bolshevism opponents the publication of the “Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR” became possible: «What’s there? — Ooh… new platitudes from the tyrant’s lips… — to be published».
And those who really were ready to lick Stalin’s boots devoutly didn’t care for his thoughts, but for the chance to lick his boot at least once in life — it’s such a good after which you could die happy. Such kinds of moral-psychological types are at enmity with each other just because of the disputes about problem whose boots to lick and about the queue and frequency of licking their idols’ boots.
2 If there’s no understanding of the global history course, then Stalin’s mentioned work is a collection of platitudes and senseless Marxist jabber — this thought is emotionally expressed by B. Khazanov in the extract from his article, which is cited above.
In order to show vivid consistency of our understanding of the «Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR» and absurdness of different opinions about Stalin’s intellectual primitivism, we had to premise parts 6.1 — 6.7 devoted to the USSR history and global politics history of the 20th century, to the present part, in which we analyze Stalin’s work.
[356] During a generation’s life the nation made its way from almost overall illiteracy, plough and splinter to the best education in the world, to industry based on advanced constructions and technologies, was getting ready to the first space flights.
[357] In other words whether God — Creator of Nature (Universe)— exists, or not, and there is just fiction about Him?
[358] The head of state and ruling party leader while during a quarter of the century personally considering almost every project of five-year or annual USSR social and economic development plan, setting tasks for the authors of the plans and projects, he can’t but notice and understand that Marxian Political Economy is a separate entity, and is neither connected with plan working-out process nor with the control process of the plans carrying out.
But if the leader just poses problems «in general» and signs documents worked up by others, putting signature where clerks show, he won’t it even during several decades, as all following USSR leaders didn’t realize that.
[359] I.e. besides people of authority there may be authoritative sources including ones without any definite authorship (for example, the Bible).
[360] On the other hand, Marxism teachers also didn’t like this question, which had no answer in Marxism. As far as they didn’t know the answer, they automatically found themselves in the opposition to Stalin’s version of life interpretation through Marxism.
[361] «Value transfer from means of production to produce» — this is a Marxist Political Economy notion. There’s no such an objective phenomenon in the real life, but there is an accounting procedure of attribution of amortised deductions, which are a legal part of means of production value, to the production price.